Royalty Thread #10 -Archie Phase 2 - Bold and Bald Still

Status
Not open for further replies.
mag said:
I vote for "Putting the 'Fun' in Dysfunctional"
Mainly because I suspect it applies to more than just the BRF.
Click to expand...
There are other royal families, after all!

But H&M have certainly taken all the attention off the Norwegians and the sad death of Martha Louise's ex-husband, the ongoing Belgian royal paternity drama of Delphine Boel and King Albert, or any other minor irritations with Charlene of Monaco's visibility.

I also would like to suggest #Sussexit Left.
 
Tesla said:
At the risk of their own mental health? What if their extended stay in Canada made them realize that staying in their old environment was too toxic for their health and family? How dare they think of what’s best for them and their son.
Click to expand...
I can't believe that Britain was their problem. I am confident that they could have stepped back, limited their time in the limelight (which is very much in their control) and been decent. So much of this was brought on by themselves. And, needlessly.

Meghan in particular flaunted her celebrity....baby showers that cost gazilions, hops in Elton John's plane etc. All of it lacked sensitivity and comportment. And who, not even a Brit marries into the BRF with "I am going to re-do the monarchy and bring it into this century. Right................... You go girl.
 
Last edited:
Regardless of what he is officially regarded as, Harry is a beloved and very high profile member of the royal family. I am wondering what the average man/woman on the street in Britain is thinking and feeling.
 
floskate said:
So you work in baggage handling at Heathrow? Obviously you wouldn't be so foolish as to read a tweet and take it as verbatim would you. Plenty of time for the flight to catch up 30 minutes on its way to Canada.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It's generally more difficult to make up time going west and depending on the jet stream, even 10 minutes can be impossible to catch up to if you go west. I've been on flights that took off on time but still touched down a few minutes late going that way.


Andora said:
Why on earth are we talking about a late plane, of all things? True or false, it's also 30 minutes late. Is it okay? Hell no-- if I'm on my way somewhere fun, I get unreasonably angry when someone is inconsiderate and holds us up. But I could count the number of flights I've taken that leave on time on one hand, so I'm missing the problem here. If it wasn't her, something else would have come up.
Click to expand...

That depends. If all of the passengers were already on board and the baggage hatch was already closed and all that then they likely would have left on time. If they were still in the process of boarding or the hatch was, at least, still open, then maybe something else would have come up or they were bound to leave late anyway.
That said, I don't think I've ever taken off or touched down on time from/at Heathrow. :p


If a Princess is why the plane is late, I've got a story for life.
Click to expand...

If I'd miss my connection and had to go through the hassle of having to be booked onto another flight, I'd be annoyed regardless of what caused the delay but I'd be even more annoyed if it was a VIP who caused the delay. With all the privileges that they enjoy, the least they could do is be on time and not hold up a flight. (And that applies to any VIP who gets the same privileges that Meghan gets). And if I were going on vacation and this happened, I'd be especially annoyed. If it's my final destination, I'd probably be more forgiving.


Andora said:
I've just heard a lot about travelling with babies/kids these last few years, so I'm hesitant to take umbrage yet. Flying is exciting and stressful on my own or in a pair-- I can't imagine a commercial flight with an infant.
Click to expand...

Except that Meghan wouldn't travel like any of us. Someone posted an interesting article on VIP treatment a while ago. (And for the record, I don't have an issue with that and I believe that every VIP (with maybe a handful of exceptions) should travel like that instead of flying on private jets. I'm just saying that commercial means something different to them than to us). https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/harry-meghan-africa-flight-commercial/index.html
 
puglover said:
Regardless of what he is officially regarded as, Harry is a beloved and very high profile member of the royal family. I am wondering what the average man/woman on the street in Britain is thinking and feeling.
Click to expand...
I heard several on the news today. They feel betrayed.
 
I read a lot of the British don’t mind but don’t think Harry and Meghan should have any funding including the Dutchy which I think is fair.

I have no doubt the media is harsh. But I got to say it doesn’t sound to me like Harry and Meghans plans are to go live like Zara and Peter Phillips. Who live pretty quiet lives.

I think it’s problematic if they get to merch royal titles....

I was iffy on Meghan. Not because of race but because of things like mailing a wedding ring. It is what it is. I hope it turns out okay.

Meghan may be a fine person don’t know her but not sure she really wanted the role she married into:

I must sat William really did pick well. Edward did too.
 
ballettmaus said:
Not necessarily. It's generally more difficult to make up time going west and depending on the jet stream, even 10 minutes can be impossible to catch up to if you go west. I've been on flights that took off on time but still touched down a few minutes late going that way.




That depends. If all of the passengers were already on board and the baggage hatch was already closed and all that then they likely would have left on time. If they were still in the process of boarding or the hatch was, at least, still open, then maybe something else would have come up or they were bound to leave late anyway.
That said, I don't think I've ever taken off or touched down on time from/at Heathrow. :p
SNIP
If I'd miss my connection and had to go through the hassle of having to be booked onto another flight, I'd be annoyed regardless of what caused the delay but I'd be even more annoyed if it was a VIP who caused the delay. With all the privileges that they enjoy, the least they could do is be on time and not hold up a flight. (And that applies to any VIP who gets the same privileges that Meghan gets). And if I were going on vacation and this happened, I'd be especially annoyed. If it's my final destination, I'd probably be more forgiving.
SNIP...
Click to expand...

You're missing my point - planes are late. All the time. It's inconsiderate and and frustrating, but that seems to the be way of it these days everywhere you go. And because this is such a normal occurrence-- super unnecessary though it should be-- I think this is a truly stupid thing to focus on in the midst of everything going on with the Royals, let alone:

manhn said:
Honestly, given what just happened a couple days ago, a 30 minute delay is the biggest airline story of 2020?
Click to expand...

THANK YOU. Good grief.
 
Last edited:
Andora said:
You're missing my point - planes are late. All the time. It's inconsiderate and and frustrating, but that seems to the be way of it these days everywhere you go.
Click to expand...

Sure, flights are delayed. And plenty of them are still on time. And if a plane is delayed because of a VIP everyone on board has the right to be annoyed. Now, this was Heathrow, so chances are, it wasn't Meghan's fault. Still, if it's true, I wouldn't be willing to give her a pass just because planes are late. Just like I wouldn't be willing to give any other VIP a pass if they delayed a plane.
 
And if she did make it late, reporting on that is not being nasty or mean or bullying. It is reporting a fact. I think Meghan, and to some extent Harry, doesn’t understand the difference between “press” and “news.” As an actress she might get “press” often controlled by her or her media people, but would not very often be “news” which is the reporting of something that has happened and deemed “newsworthy.” As the Dutchess of Sussex she has become newsworthy so things she does, whether she like it or not, may be reported as news. She doesn’t, and shouldn’t, have control over how those stories are written or reported as long as they are accurate. That is why we have reporters who are independent of the state. If a news organization reported that she held up a flight for 30 minutes, and that is true, they are within their rights to report it. It should be noted that much of the reporting that they complained was not true has actually turned out to be true.

They have also complained a lot about the paparazzi and compare what Meghan has gone through to what Diana went through. Ask yourself, when was the last time you saw a paparazzi photo of Meghan and Harry. I can remember one when they were dating and going out to dinner. If someone wants to link to one from after they were married I would like to see it.

The fact is they are not chased by paparazzi. Times, for the most part, have changed. Those photos from Meghan’s baby shower, with all the flashes, it was the Sussex team that sent the schedule out so the press would know where she was. When they attend an opening or an event they are there because they are “news” and the press Corp is reporting on it.

It has been reported that they wanted out of the press Corp rota. They wanted to choose who covered them at engagements. Again, that is not how news works. You don’t get to control the news; Britain is not an authoritarian state.

As private citizens they will be able to somewhat control their press, but they will most likely no longer be part of the unwritten agreement between the Palace and the paparazzi. Without that protection they may find they have gone out of the frying pan and into the fire. I hope not. I hope it can all be worked out. But as the Queen said, it is complicated.
 
@AxelAnnie
I can't believe that Britain was their problem
Click to expand...

The British tabloids are merciless, and are not afraid to exaggerate either. And they compete with each other, which gives them even more incentive to be as attention-grabbing as possible. With that sort of media coverage - which IME people outside the UK don't really understand the intensity of until they see it or experience it - I have no problem whatsoever believing that Britain was a major part of their problem.
 
Megxit has already been used a lot on Twitter and in the media. FSU should be more original than that!

The time is not right for Toddlers and Tiaras so I will go with Putting the 'Fun' in Dysfunctional.
 
I'm not excusing that she made the plane late. I'm noting this is a super petty detail for anyone to get caught up on - and it would go for any of the Royals. Short of them blatantly saying "let them eat airline peanuts,' this whole thing is nitpicky over 30 damn minutes. Surely we can find other fantastic details to fascinate over instead? I'll keep trying...
 
Vagabond said:
The time is ripe for a new thread. The only nominators appear to be @Zemgirl and me. :shuffle:

Nominated by Vagabond:

"Stepping Back"
"Things Are Getting Harry"
"A Harry Escape"
"Nothing Succeeds Like Sussex"'
"'I'm a Minor Royal, Get Me Out of Here!"
"Kind Hearts and Coronets"
"Putting the 'Fun' in Dysfunctional"
"Running Away from Home with Lots of Baggage"
"The Married Lives of Windsor"

Nominated by Zemgirl:

The Break-up
Harry and Meghan's Great British Spinoff.
I'll show myself out.

I don't think Zemgirl meant to nominate that last one, but it seems at least as appropriate as any of the others, so it stays.

ETA: And, quasi-nominated by @allezfred:

#megxit

If no one else starts a new one in the next twelve hours or so, I will do so based on a popular vote. After all, what is a royalty thread for, if not democracy? :p
Click to expand...

Pleas, please, please can we have a title that doesn't mention this whole debacle going on. No mention of Harry, Meghan or any other specific royal please. It is suppose to be an all encompassing Royal thread.

The only one from that list that does that is 'Kind Hearts and Coronets'. May I also suggest 'Toddlers, Tantrums and Tiaras' if we want to acknowledge the current debacle in a round about way!!

ETA: It seems most want to reference the current BRF issue in the title so if that's the case 'Putting the 'Fun' in Dysfunctional' would get my vote if 'Toddlers, Tantrums and Tiaras' doesn't cut it!!
 
Last edited:
mag said:
I think we should stay clear of anything that is just a play on Meghan’s name. Harry and Meghan are in this together. Plays on Sussex are, IMHO, okay, but not just on Meghan.
Click to expand...

Quite. This idea that this is all on her really winds me up. Also notice that headlines are almost always "Meghan and Harry" compared to predominantly "Charles and Camilla" or "William and Kate" imho in the British press that's a way of consistently implying that she is running the show and responsible for any bad choices because being frank even when they kind of sort of suggested any indication of change was good there were almost always also criticisms. Oh she did something we have to acknowledge as positive? But she didn't wear tights!!! Bare legs!!! Come on!

Harry has always been a loose cannon. The difference is that before Meghan his bad behaviour got a pass and now anything he does is bad behaviour regardless of the background.

Nazi costumes at 20? Oh he's young... It's just a bit of fun... no and no... he's an adult. There is not a 20yo in Europe (and I expect the US/Canada etc) who doesn't know that society as a whole doesn't joke about this and it's not ok.

Naked in Vegas at 27... Oh the RPOs should have... It's just a bit of fun... No and no... he is responsible for his reputation not his RPOs. He didn't care!

Racial slurs in the army... Oh it's just banter very common... It's not ok!!! The army may be rife with it. But no one saying that stuff doesnt know its not ok. Do better you are supposed to be setting an example

Scuttling and physical alterations with photographers.... Oh but....

And it goes on. A couple if people have referred to him previously wanting an "out" from Royal life. I think examples like the above showed little to no regard for the institution and some of them were immature rebellions based on exactly that. He went through a period, following his return from the army, of "growing into" his role and all seemed well but he has also been clear he has had challenges that went on for many years/never really stopped around the press.

I think that following that period and having married and had a child he has now determined that it is not the role he wants. And he is seeking a way to breakaway. Is this approach ideal? No. But it's a heck of a lot more mature and considered than we've seen from him in the past. I doubt he will ever be one to behave in as deliberate and considered a manner as William... and he's not the heir so he doesn't have those same restrictions.

manhn said:
Honestly, given what just happened a couple days ago, a 30 minute delay is the biggest airline story of 2020?
Click to expand...

Exactly!

That said I gave never left Heathrow on time in 20 years on any airline and about 95% of BA flights I've ever taken from any airport have left late.

I've sat on BA flights (that said they were ready for take off) for 30mins+ after scheduled take off at Heathrow on I would say over 15 occasions. They almost always land on time. It's sop for BA. When I flew to Mexico in September I actually joked to my family that I'm convinced BA schedule 30-45mins on the ground into their reported flight times. We left over 30mins late and landed 15mins early!

AxelAnnie said:
I heard several on the news today. They feel betrayed.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Just no. It's anecdotal but I haven't spoken to a single fellow Brit if who feels "betrayed". The press may feel betrayed but they don't speak for the rest of us as one big blob. Most related chat at work yesterday on the subject involved various conversation laughing at the newspaper headlines/meltdown, making up our own headlines for the various papers and generally wondering why the press don't just let them be!

There was some discussion about what it might mean to the taxpayer but also a discussion about the reality of the sovereign grant.
 
Last edited:
puglover said:
Regardless of what he is officially regarded as, Harry is a beloved and very high profile member of the royal family. I am wondering what the average man/woman on the street in Britain is thinking and feeling.
Click to expand...

It's pretty mixed. Some are not happy, others say good for them. People are questioning how it will happen - who pays for their security is a big one. Some say Harry has disrespected the Queen, others say Harry wasn't being listened to. And these are just from people I have spoken to. The few I know have read both Harry's statement and also checked out the new website have certainly been a little perplexed with some of the content - how he can both represent the Queen but still be able to earn an income is one such question being raised as well as the security issue and who pays for it.

I think the fact that Harry and Meghan have trademarked the 'SussexRoyal' moniker which allows them to use it on all sorts of things from pencil cases and tea towels to crockery etc is an indication of how they could make income and I guess that is one difficulty the BRF may have - basically selling and making money off their royal title. I could well be wrong but when I read about their trademarking efforts I did wonder.

As to security - Harry seems to believe he should get it but as he wants to step down from being a senior royal he can't really expect the tax payer to keep paying that through the use of the Met Police as that is usually only provided to Senior Royals. Prince Andrew dealt with that issue for his daughters by paying for it himself. And if they want to live overseas for part of the year then again the British taxpayers most certainly can't be expected to pay up - though I understand the Canadians on here who say they shouldn't have to pay either if Canada is their final destination. As Harry seems to think he should still get money from Prince Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of security eventually comes out of the money Harry gets from there for both here in the UK and abroad.

As to Meghan flying back to Canada after leaving Archie there that seems to imply she wasn't planning on staying long back here in the UK on this particular trip. The question I do have is the baggage that apparently had to be loaded on to the plane seems disproportionate to a 4-5 day trip. Did she come back and pack up more clothes from Frogmore to take back to Canada - if so is that where she and Harry are going to base themselves from now on?
 
I don't like 'Megzit', as it ingnores that there are two people in this exit.

I do really like "Running Away from Home with Lots of Baggage"

But that's wordy. So I'd choose 'Kind Hearts and Coronets'.
 
I remember being a young girl and all the teen magazines being obsessed with William and Harry.

As an Australian, I feel quite disappointed by all this. Harry is popular, particularly with the work he did with the Invictus Games.

I think what I’m trying to say is that the Commonwealth Realm is far, far bigger than the British tabloids.

It seems disappointing and premature to end everything over a short period of bad press in one section of the commonwealth. After all, we’ve seen plenty of other public figures resurrect reputations from the ashes of disaster.

(Any Australians could look to the total reinvention of Nick Kyrgios recently as a prime example).

I’ve always liked the monarchy for providing a sense of continuity that sits above all the awful politicians that constantly come and go. I think that it’s an important factor that unites commonwealth countries and I think it makes things feel stable. So in that sense, I think it’s something worth standing up for.

With the Queen ageing, right now is the time for stability because it would be awful for her to pass when things are consumed by drama and fighting.

The royal family might be just gossip for Americans, but it’s actually part of the constitution and government process for a section of the world.
 
Lorac said:
It's pretty mixed. Some are not happy, others say good for them. People are questioning how it will happen - who pays for their security is a big one. Some say Harry has disrespected the Queen, others say Harry wasn't being listened to. And these are just from people I have spoken to. The few I know have read both Harry's statement and also checked out the new website have certainly been a little perplexed with some of the content - how he can both represent the Queen but still be able to earn an income is one such question being raised as well as the security issue and who pays for it.

I think the fact that Harry and Meghan have trademarked the 'SussexRoyal' moniker which allows them to use it on all sorts of things from pencil cases and tea towels to crockery etc is an indication of how they could make income and I guess that is one difficulty the BRF may have - basically selling and making money off their royal title. I could well be wrong but when I read about their trademarking efforts I did wonder.

As to security - Harry seems to believe he should get it but as he wants to step down from being a senior royal he can't really expect the tax payer to keep paying that through the use of the Met Police as that is usually only provided to Senior Royals. Prince Andrew dealt with that issue for his daughters by paying for it himself. And if they want to live overseas for part of the year then again the British taxpayers most certainly can't be expected to pay up - though I understand the Canadians on here who say they shouldn't have to pay either if Canada is their final destination. As Harry seems to think he should still get money from Prince Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of security eventually comes out of the money Harry gets from there for both here in the UK and abroad.

As to Meghan flying back to Canada after leaving Archie there that seems to imply she wasn't planning on staying long back here in the UK on this particular trip. The question I do have is the baggage that apparently had to be loaded on to the plane seems disproportionate to a 4-5 day trip. Did she come back and pack up more clothes from Frogmore to take back to Canada - if so is that where she and Harry are going to base themselves from now on?
Click to expand...

The more I think about this the more I think that sadly Harry and Megan will end up in the wilderness as there really isn't a middle ground. The fact that Harry thinks he can make this work seems to suggest he's given very little thought to the actual workings of the institution he's grown up in. All the questions above are really valid.

I think:
  • this idea of being able to maintain a grace and favour home only 6 months of the year whilst aiming to generate income won't be well received. It will reflect poorly not only on H&M if this is allowed but also on the monarchy;
  • I suspect the firm will quickly kick into touch any plans to profit from merchandising and I'm surprised they haven't already done so (they may have behind closed doors). I actually think that if Harry and Meghan try to get round this they'll lose their titles so that they cannot correctly continue to profit from them;
  • If they lose their titles there will be every attempt to carefully stage manage it... Maybe a couple of years down the line they relinquish them rather than being stripped of them? That would be better for everyone.
  • This idea of a halfway house will be short-lived. Either they will be back in the fold in 12months or more likely gradually transitioned out of a role completely.
  • regardless of outcome I think the security costs will be the biggest on going debate and agree likely Charles will end up perhaps somewhat reluctantly) footing them. Whilst I don't think the public will like it it's probably the best outcome... make up for some of That tax he's not paying eh? He will I imagine want to protect his son and grandson regardless of these circumstances.

I think they've underestimated the steps that will be taken to protect the firm and what that will mean for them especially by apparently announcing something that hadn't been agreed. How can you announce assuming your house, titles, status for security etc don't change when you change your role? When you don't have control over those things within your gift?

Still think this is probably best for them and support and wish them all the best though. Harry just needs to realise that a break from "his duty" will almost inevitably mean a break with or at least reduction in the privileges as well as the burdens that come with it.
 
mella said:
I think they've underestimated the steps that will be taken to protect the firm and what that will mean for them especially by apparently announcing something that hadn't been agreed. How can you announce assuming your house, titles, status for security etc don't change when you change your role? When you don't have control over those things within your gift?
Click to expand...

It's quite a different situation to say, Princess Eugenie, who isn't a working royal, but instead works in an art gallery, but still lives in Kensington Palace in the royal fold.

My main misgivings about the current situation with Meghan and Harry is how the announcement seems to have been designed to cause maximum impact and negative press to the Royal Family. But I think only time will tell. Maybe they will retire into a life of privacy. Maybe not.

I think that Meghan could have been good for the royal family, so it's a shame that they gave in to everything so soon. There are literally still some little decorations sitting around my house from the viewing party for their wedding! (lol it seems two seconds ago). In the end, any momentary satisfaction or impact from 'look what you made us do' will probably pale into insignificance compared to what they could have achieved as life long royals. But if it's not what they want, that's what it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Sylvia
2026 Euros in Sheffield GBR planning thread
2 3
Replies
66
Views
9K
litenkyckling
litenkyckling
MsZem
  • Locked
Royalty thread #15: A New Era
42 43 44
Replies
1K
Views
123K
PRlady
PRlady
canbelto
Bridgerton thread (with spoilers)
Replies
28
Views
5K
canbelto
canbelto
Sylvia
"Legacy on Ice" benefit show in D.C. (March 2, 2025) and ways to help those affected by the air tragedy over the Potomac River
15 16 17
Replies
499
Views
59K
paskatefan
paskatefan
Sylvia
Stars on Ice Spring 2025 tour in Canada & U.S.
2 3
Replies
65
Views
15K
japanice
J
Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information